You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Earlier versions of Mockaco used to fully parse AspNet Core Routing constraints like {field:int} or package/{operation:regex(^track|create$)}/{id:int}.
The example route template package/{operation:regex(^track|create$)}/{id:int} matches routes like package/foo/bar, ignoring the regex and int constraints:
Describe the solution you'd like
The best solution so far is to reimplement the first approach of using full asp net routing infrastructure instead of just using the TemplateMatcher.
Describe alternatives you've considered
Another approach is to find the proper classes to compute routing constraints, but it would end up bringing complexity to the code.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Is your feature request related to a problem? Please describe.
Earlier versions of Mockaco used to fully parse AspNet Core Routing constraints like
{field:int}
orpackage/{operation:regex(^track|create$)}/{id:int}
.In an attempt to simplify the routing decision process, the feature was lost, so it's not considering the routing constraints anymore, basically because TemplateMatcher class does not compute constraints.
The example route template
package/{operation:regex(^track|create$)}/{id:int}
matches routes likepackage/foo/bar
, ignoring the regex and int constraints:Describe the solution you'd like
The best solution so far is to reimplement the first approach of using full asp net routing infrastructure instead of just using the TemplateMatcher.
Describe alternatives you've considered
Another approach is to find the proper classes to compute routing constraints, but it would end up bringing complexity to the code.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: